tv The Communicators CSPAN December 5, 2015 6:00pm-6:31pm EST
has not operated as a crime control program, it has been an immigration enforcement program. senator: i just meant sanctuary cities versus non-sanctuary cities and whether -- in the whole point was to build trust in a community and on a macro level, what effect has that had, any data regarding that? seenosenblum: i have not that data. senator: some colleagues have argued that a decrease in ice removal's, that we have seen evidence that we are deporting fewer people, or that is, then the decision is uninterested in enforcing immigration laws there would account for these numbers and what does it say about the overall state of enforcement? kind of the subject of this hearing. dr. rosenblum: when you look at
overall numbers, they remain a high levels. 418,000 there are formal removals from the united eight -- estate. the obama admin surgeon has removed -- administration has removed 4000 or more every year, so every year, there have been ine removals than any year the bush administers a. so we have seen a sharp increase and border removals and a number of ice agents have been shifted to the border, partly to respond to the child migration surge, because we have seen an increase in families and children coming from central america, and that is difficult to -- rather than expedited removal, so they have surged resources there and also
surgeded resources -- resources -- so if you want to look at the two most important numbers, unauthorized immigrants are down by one million since 2007. this is a sustained drought. -- drop. we have seen a seven-year drop. and border apprehensions have had a sustained drop, when you subtract out unaccompanied children, when you look at immigrants at the border, those apprehended at the border, those are also at a 40 year low and mexican numbers are continue to drop, year after year. seven years after the great recession, we still see fewer apprehensions. senator: i am out of time. may i ask one more question, i think it is a short answer. questioning in his
cited the number of 12 million deportations during the clinton administration. you are just saying that there in each ofportations the years of the obama administration then under previous administrations. is, it head says there does not compute. sen. sessions: that is a good head.ad -- math major in math? major in math not i did not go to m.i.t..
sen. sessions: you are good at math. dr. is in bloom -- dr. rosenblum: during the clinton years and early bush years, we had huge volumes of border apprehensions, because the state of border security is not as good as it is now. 95% or more apprehended at the border were turned around. so over the course of the clinton administration, there probably were about 12 million, close to 12 million border apprehensions over the course of eight years. probably not quite that high. the number of removals, formal returns and deportations over the course of the full eight years of the clinton administration, probably between 4000-5000. senator: in other words, apples and oranges. in which, the formal removals
versus turn ways at the border. right.enblum: prior to the bush administration, the highest number of formal removals was in the high thousands. senator: when you brought that up, i thought, something is not right. thank you mr. chairman for your indulgence and thank you to all of you for your service. sen. sessions: what did happen is that ice, when numbers began to plummet, they started counting border removals as part of their removals and it is a misrepresentation, deliberately to hide the weakness that was occurring. what we do know is the administers and asked for enough aliens aremove 400,000 year, yet in 2014, they removed only215000 and in 2015,
230000 and only some of those were criminal aliens removed. vaughan, would you like to briefly comment? ms. vaughan: i want to say that on the issue of the killing of fact, there are some excellent studies on this, about whether or not cooperation of local law enforcement compromises community policing. it is pretty clear that this effect of some sort of is a myth, not supported by data, academic surveys, or the actual experience of law enforcement people. so there is a lot of information on that. with respect to deportation, what senator cruz was referring
to was all deportations, including anyone supported by ice -- deported by ice or border control, so he was counting apples and oranges against, the apples and oranges count of that same deportation under the obama administration. i would have to check the numbers, i think it is consistent with the department of homeland security has reported in their annual yearbook. so i think it is pretty accurate and you are right, what the obama administration does differently as they started taking border control cases, which formally would have been counted as returns and processing them as a removal, said that they would pump up officially, the number of removals which is one form of deportation. when you talk about counting removals, you are not counting all deportations. sen. sessions: let's follow up on that.
mexicans attempting to cross the border unlawfully, they can be stopped at the border and immediately sent back, is that correct? ms. vaughan: the most accelerated away to do it is expedited removal, yes. and let's you want to prosecute them for reentry. sen. sessions: but when people come from central america, with or without children, they can can't belum, they immediately sent back to mexico. so then they are in the united states and what i have been hearing is it that they turn themselves into federal officers and say, take care of me. and what is happening, frequently -- ms. vaughan: yes, from what i
hear from border patrol agents is that they turn themselves in to the border control and the border patrol is required, well, under the current interpretation turnat is required, they families and children over to the office of refugee resettlement and process them as unaccompanied minors or with the families, they are offered the opportunity to apply for asylum and then are released to appear at a court hearing at some time in the future. it said they are offered a generous form of due process, when they could be processed through expedited removal, just like any other recent border crosser. but it shows that they made this to allow them to have a hearing, rather than use expedited removal. sen. sessions: this is a, in
effect, so -- sen. sessions: usually that asylum claim comes later. sen. sessions: my understanding and my criticism of this is we have had a huge flow increase. you are sending a message to central america that all you have to do to get into the country is come in and attend yourself then to the feds. that,y did things like but what they did not change is the policy. and now we are having another surge again, now and i see top stateds, one of them that you normally see a decline in flow at this time of year but is still increasing. it is not declining. so what is your opinion with regard to the necessity of having a clear immigration policy, before somebody leaves
their home, spend a lot of money, places themselves at risk to get into the united states, don't they need to know that they will likely be apprehended and will in fact be deported and if we do that consistently, we ,ould have a -- of the attempts is that right? arrivalsan: what new tell the border patrol is the came because they knew they could stay. if we want to change that, the policy has to change. they get text messages, messages on facebook and so on with pictures of the nose of appeal -- onotice of appeal and attending the back to people in their home country. people are coming because they know they are allowed to stay and before that changes, they will keep coming. sen. sessions: especially for people in underdeveloped worlds,
they do not pay attention to the law, they want to know what will happen. it will happen is, under the current circumstances, they are going to be turned over to law enforcement officers, placed in a secure place and held and family members and others, if they get in the country and this will only accelerate the problem. mr. thompson, are you familiar with the 287 g? mr. thompson: i am familiar. sen. sessions: remember when that got started and worked with the bush and administration on it, they were a little slow. you get nervous if you let local law enforcement have a role to play, so you need a big training program before anybody can really rest. they can arrest the mayor of the arrestut they cannot somebody who is illegally in the country unless they have a long-term training program, but
that is what they agreed to and to the bill was passed and they gded quite a number of 287 programs or contracts, which essentially told the local law enforcement what they could do, how they could do and what they could do to identify dangerous criminals. i am amazed that it is declined by more than half, it appears, in the last few years. certainly it should have been been made -- they should have sought it to be nationwide in every jurisdiction. mr. thompson: it is staggering, because that number could go even lower. there are two principal problems for local law enforcement, in particular sheriffs, to purchase the into 87 g. cost tost, it is a jails because they have to confer -- convert jails.
enormousow, that is an burden, a financial burden on a small copy of one-to-three deputies. sen. sessions: was that originally the situation? mr. thompson: it was not. sen. sessions: remember alabama was one of the first states approved. mr. thompson: that is probably correct. that cost can be staggering to a small community, if you look at the border crossings alone in texas all the way to california, the cost to become compliant would bankrupt a sheriff. you are talking about -- sen. sessions: thank you for sharing that. mr. thompson: you are talking about new facilities, new bed, new clothes, new training, the training alone for new deputies to understand the ice programs,
it requires 14 days away from their office to be compliant in the ice training procedures. it is a staggering cost to these 287l counties, yet, in the g program, there is little funds to reimburse these counties. sen. sessions: often they have to pay their own expenses. mr. thompson: absolutely. sen. sessions: go ahead. mr. thompson: so i was listening heade discussion and my almost exploded, give it directly to sheriffs and we will put it into the 287 g requirements and they will be glad to help the federal government. sen. sessions: that is fabulous. listen, sheriffs and police have an incentive, because if you have a bad person, you want them removed from the country, not just from the streets. but i have thought that the federal government should spend
more money to help this and other the training program was long, dear member how long? mr. thompson: i believe 14 business days. ms. vaughan: five weeks. sen. sessions: i believe that is right. that is a lot of training to things anda few basically how to handle yourself. february, in in may, i was down in a remote county, it is one of the highest transit points in the nation for illegal immigrants. 16 sheriffs deputies, if they participated in this program they have to be out of the office to understand, the have to meet training requirements taken care ofis by that county, not by ice. they might pay the lodging cost, airfare, but those deputies are
not doing their job. they are now out training, so now that county pays overtime to cover the loss. this is a backbreaking exercise. with tomst week coleman and this is one of the issues we have to fix and i think there is a solution there. we will work with them, do whatever it takes, but to hear $130 million is returned and reprogrammed because they did not spend it, when sheriffs are going broke on the border, set us the money. do not give it to the governor, give it to the sheriffs. sen. sessions: 2 million criminal aliens in the country, it seems to me that if the
expandedation utilized 287 g they would have identified many of those instead of being released, and now they may be committing other crimes on a regular basis, the demise in other people. is that a legend may concern? ms. vaughan: it most deftly is and -- most definitely is and about half of those criminal aliens are at large. that is an estimate i came up with once the program got rolling. the problem is not so much finding terminal aliens, because with that interoperability, there is an alert, there is a fingerprint taken of somebody matches in the database. the problem is also that many of the illegal aliens here committing crimes are not known to dhs yet, because they cross
the border illegally and they were not apprehended by border patrol, nobody has taken fingerprints other is nothing to match it to. in some places, i was told by jail supervisors, one in texas, 287 g program and he said that many in the jail were not identified through fingerprints, that it requires an interview with the alien to determine that they are here illegally. so more is required than just matching fingerprints, that is why it is such a problem with sanctuary jurisdictions, blocking access to the jails, because now nobody has any idea who these people are, where they are from, so that is a public safety vulnerability and they get released on top of it and
they have the ability to go about criminal activity. and they do reoffend, ice officials will tell you off the record, they believe about 50% of criminal aliens that are released for one reason or another, sanctuary or because of policies, will go on to reoffend. sen. sessions: i am not surprised. that is about the rate we have anyway. thank you all, this is an important issue. i believe truly that we are undermining deliberately the effectiveness of our immigration laws. this is encouraging people to come to america, unlawfully. to not comply, making a mockery of those who patiently wait and try to do it the right way, denying the american people the selecto choose and
people by law that can prove that they will serve the national interest and will most likely prosper in our country instead of not prosper. it is a very bad thing and the president has no right, because the legislation that he wanted to pass did not pass, to carry on in this fashion and i think that this today demonstrated the failure of our system in the one area that we were promised was going to be aggressively pursued was criminal aliens and that was plummeting also, so there is nothing working effectively. so thank you for testifying, the record will remain open for one week. the hearing is adjourned. [chatter]
>> in his weekly address, president obama talks about the san bernardino shootings and gun-control legislation. representative candice miller gave the republican response, she discusses legislation to tighten the visa waiver program. : hi. everybody. this week, our hearts are with the people of san bernardino. we salute the first responders, the police, the swat teams, the emts who responded so quickly with courage and save the lives. we pray for the injured as they recover. most of all, we stand with 14 families whose hearts are broken. learning more about loved ones, the men and women, the pitiful lives lost -- beautiful lives lost, they were enjoying the
holidays and celebrating with each other. in their bonded of friendship and community. their deaths are in absolute tragedy, not just for san bernardino, but for our country. we are also learning more about the killers, working to get a full picture of their motives, why they committed these acts. it is important to let investigators do their jobs and we need to know all the facts and federal law enforcement is helping in every way they can. we will get to the bottom of this. it is entirely possible that these to eat packers -- two attackers were radicalized and that would underscore a threat we have recognized for years, people succumbing to extremist ideologies are we know that i isil and other groups are encouraging people to commit terrible acts of violence. and even as we work to defend
attacks, all of us, government, law enforcement, communities, faith leaders, need to work together to prevent people from falling victim to these ideologies. more broadly, this tragedy reminds us of our obligation to do everything to keep communities safe. we know that the killers used military style assault weapons, weapons of war, to kill as many people as they could. it is another tragic reminder that in america is way too easy for dangerous people to get their hands on a gun. for example, right now people on the no-fly list can walk into a store and buy a gun, that is insane. if you are too dangerous to board a plane, you are too dangerous to buy a gun. and i am calling on congress to close this loophole now. we may not be able to prevent every tragedy, but we cannot
make it so easy for potential terrorists or criminals to get hands on guns they can use against americans. today in san bernardino, they are searching for answers, across the country law enforcement officials are tireless, working around the clock to protect our communities. as president, my highest priority is the security and safety of the american people. this will unite us all, so that we do everything to protect our country. that is how we can honor those lives lost in san bernardino. we are americans, we will uphold our values and our free and open society. we are strong and we are resilient and we will not be terrorized. miller: the next terrorist attacks the country can be just one -- away.
the point of the visa waiver program is to make it easier from friendly -- people from friendly countries to enter the united states. you can come for up to 90 days without a visa. that means you do not have to do an in person interview. there are 30 participating countries and all of them are good friends of america, people like britain and france and belgium. this promotes tourism and it helps jobs for americans. that being said, it is no secret isis is recruiting people from many of the same countries. for instance, the masterminds of the attacks in paris was a citizen of belgium. we want all these applicants -- but other countries often do not give us all the information we need to identify possible suspects. the gunman on a paris bound
train in august is a prime example. authorities have been watching him for some time, but they were to prevent him coming into the united states or we cannot give people from other countries special access to our country with all the information we need. that is why i am working with my colleagues to strengthen the security of our visa waiver programs, legislation would allow homeland security to suspend a countries participation if it does not give us the information that we need to stop terrorists from coming here. the bill would also disqualify anybody who has traveled to syria and iraq within the past five years in participating in our program. from now on, they'll have to get
a visa and go through all additional security steps it requires. finally, the bill would strengthen efforts by combining the new practice before an applicant can travel to the united states. free andans, this is a open society and terrorists are looking for opportunities to exploit those freedoms and use them against us. we need to think clearly and clearly we have a major weakness in our visa waiver program, this is a hole that we need to close. we'll use -- and they will use every means to attack our country and that is why we need to use our power to defend it. this cannot wait. we must act now. thank you. >> on c-span, the communicators is next with a look how social media is used by terrorists.
then our original series, landmark cases, continues with decision,e court 1961 which strengthen the fourth amendment decision against illegal search and seizure. goo hen representative bob dlatte. c-span, created by america's cable companies and brought to you as a public service by your local provider. week on the communicators but discussion of how terrorists use social media. who wasfernandez president of the middle east research institute. wallace, ceo of the counter
extremism project. we try to counter the existence of the propaganda. focusing on the economic and social networks that support terrorism. we try to use the power of economic pressure and social media to thwart extremist efforts in the new theaters of warfare. you see it playing out in the internet. businesses that are providing support for terrorism.